Divisive & Unpopular “Civil Unions” Bill Does Not Promote the General Welfare of the Citizenry

In the waning days of the previous General Assembly, during a lame-duck session and by razor thin margins, Illinois lawmakers passed a bill that radically redefines marriage and family.

“Marriage was not created by man or governments,” said IFI Executive Director David E. Smith. “It is an institution created by God. Governments merely recognize its nature and importance.”

Marriage is the institution that societies worldwide have recognized and encouraged because this unique relationship between a man and a woman provides particular benefits to society, chief among them, the procreation and nurturing of the next generation.

IFI’s Director of School Advocacy Laurie Higgins says “If marriages were centrally or solely about affirming love between individuals, the government would have no reason to be involved in the business of sanctioning marriage. Government sanctions the type of relationship into which children may be born and raised because the government recognizes that that institution which best serves the needs and rights of children is the institution that best serves as the needs of a healthy society.”

“It is either ignorant or dishonest to suggest that the inclusion of sexual complementarity in the list of central defining criteria for government-sanctioned marriage denies homosexuals a civil right,” says Higgins.

Civil unions are merely a stepping stone to legalized same-sex marriage. Of the central defining criteria for marriage — number of partners, blood kinship, minimum age and sexual complementarity — sexual complementarity is the most enduring. Therefore, eliminating it constitutes the most radical redefinition of marriage imaginable.

“Gov. Quinn should reject this anti-family bill and reject the efforts of the homosexual lobby to impose this highly contentious and controversial policy on the people of Illinois. Homosexual behavior is not equivalent to race and gender diversity is essential to marriage. It is intellectually dishonest to argue otherwise” said Smith.

Higgins states that “Once marriage is severed from procreative potential and gender, it becomes meaningless as a public institution. “

Philosophical conservatives and all people who are committed to rational argument need to openly, courageously, and persistently challenge the flawed analogy that suggests that homosexuality is equivalent to race. Likewise, the legislative push for special rights legislation for special interest groups based on sexual inclinations and volitional sexual behavior must be challenged.